One of the leading causes of the death in the US is prescription medications, due to deadly combinations, overdose, allergic reactions, etc. or simply as a "side-effect" of the med. I think most people accept there is risk with everything we take, and that the risk must be weighed up against the potential benefit.

For instance Chemo can kill, but leaving the cancer untreated is MORE likely to cause death. That choice isn't so difficult ...

Psoriasis is very unlikely to reduce life expectancy or kill the patient, so the risk/benefit considerations for using this kind of med are quite a different scenario. Then again, if the patient is suffering to the point that life is hardly worth living, and the drug can potentially change that substantially, that is an important consideration too.

Unfortunately, it is not ONLY the "last resort" patients that are recommended these very risky meds. The goal of any company is to get as many people as possible on their med, and they do this by down-playing any deadly "side-effects". They direct their marketing efforts to focusing on the potential advantages (over other drugs), and human nature being what it is, we will often choose the "best bang for our buck".

At the end of the day though, if people are fully informed of the risk they are taking, I agree they should have the choice. However, that requires that there is FULL DISCLOSURE on the true risk, i.e. not 3 cases out of 46,000 (as was stated in this article), but 3 cases in 1,100 (over three years).

Cherie